Shadow of the Colossus told a frantic story of love and desperation on par with movies without a script. Sony Japan for you Miyamoto. Sony learned to how to tell a story using gameplay. Don't know anything about that?
| S.T.A.G.E. said: Shadow of the Colossus told a frantic story of love and desperation on par with movies without a script. Sony Japan for you Miyamoto. Sony learned to how to tell a story using gameplay. Don't know anything about that? |
Love interest dies. Kill 16 colossi to revive her. lol just kidding.
I love the game, but not because of the story...
it does get boring when you're playing a movie rather than a game
| R.I.P Mr Iwata :'( | ||
 |
|
|
| Dannyson97 said: I'm suprised by how people don't understand what he's saying. He isn't completely disregarding story or narrative, what he's trying to get across is that a game shouldn't be made with story as the driving force. The gameplay should what makes you want to play it, can their be a story, of course there can he didn't say there couldn't but if you use gameplay just as means to get to the next part of the story that's a problem. I'll compare Ocarina of time against Assaisians Creed 3, just as an EXAMPLE. If you took the story out of Ocarina of time you still have a decent game with a puzzle solving combat style of gameplay, and a open world to explore. If you did the same to Assasian's Creed 3 I'd say it suffer more heavily since I often felt the combat and stealth were lacking.(though some may still enjoy it without the story). Story is important in games I enjoy it myself, but gameplay and design is what's going to make me play the game again, it's what makes the expierence hat Miyamoto was talking about here. |
We understand perfectly well.
Again, the problem here is that this, Dannyson97, is how you feel. Do you think that your opinion represents every gamer's? There is no problem with the story being the focus of a game and The Walking Dead: Season One is a perfect example of that. What you and Miyamoto don't understand is that gamers have all kinds of tastes when it comes to games. Why not have some games with focus on gameplay and others with focus on story?
And to everyone thinking that playing a very story driven game is the same as watching a movie, well all I can say is that I and many other people don't feel that way. When you watch a movie, you are completely passive. With a video game, your decisions, lack of attention, etc make a difference. I won't give any examples to avoid spoilers but there have been many times that I played a story driven game and didn't know whether to save someone or let them die (for the greater good). The feeling you get when playing such games in completely different from watching movies.
| KLXVER said:
I love the game, but not because of the story...
|
Thats the best part, the gameplay was the bulk of the story. Outside of the reason to fight and the love he showed for the girl it was in battles told the real story. Heh
| S.T.A.G.E. said: Shadow of the Colossus told a frantic story of love and desperation on par with movies without a script. Sony Japan for you Miyamoto. Sony learned to how to tell a story using gameplay. Don't know anything about that? |
You know thats exactly what he's saying right? The story didnt take you out of the gameplay.
zorg1000 said:
Who is they? Are you talking about Nintendo as a whole now? This thread and ur previous post were about Miyamoto specifically. |
Miyamoto is one of the head figures at Nintendo and he's a director/developer, he has massive influence and the modern Nintendo is very much subject to this and his direction of gaming and software development. He is the head honcho of Nintendo's software development but he's not the only developer they have; hence "they". And those problems I mentioned are software related; hence pertaining to MIyamoto's presence at Nintendo and a direct failing under his supervision. There are plenty of other issues that I didn't mention because they are not directly (or as directly, anyway) related to Miyamoto's influence.
PS: I don't like the Hollywood direction gaming has taken either, just to be clear, and I've been whining about it for years in here.
Rafux said:
Learn to read, art can be anything it can be fun but it also doesnt have to be fun to be art, it can be anything. Games HAVE to be fun above all, thats the catch. A game can't be just an expression and have no fun gameplay mechanics at all it would not be a game at all. Games have literature, drawings and music yet they just use them like a museum would use art to atract viewers but the museum is not art in itself. Belive what you want though. |
I kind of think you're wrong on this a little. Games do not necessarily HAVE to be fun. Example are horror games. People do not play them for fun, they play them for the experience. I think the real requirement for a game is that it has to be engaging.
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Thats the best part, the gameplay was the bulk of the story. Outside of the reason to fight and the love he showed for the girl it was in battles told the real story. Heh |
So you do agree with him then...?
Miyamoto just confirms what we've all been saying for a long time, he makes games for children, not adults. Knowing that makes you understand his views, which is why he wishes there were children in the room.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2024 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
